Down to Earth But Heavenly Minded

What does Mark Chapter 10 mean?

Where Luke and John give an extensive account of Jesus’ teaching between Galilee and Perea, Mark skips ahead to the action. He leaves out Jesus’ exhortation to forgive seventy-times-seven (Matthew 18:15–35), the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:11–31), controversial teachings in Jerusalem (John 8:12–59; Luke 11:14–36), the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37), the death and resurrection of Lazarus (John 11:1–44), and several confrontations with the Pharisees that incited the religious leaders to try to find a way to kill Him (John 10:22–39).

Mark 10 probably begins in the region of Perea, on the other side of the Jordan River from Judea, where John the Baptist had his ministry. It ends in Jericho, on the way to Jerusalem and the cross. The stories revolve around the way in which those with worldly power naturally reject God’s way. Some by rejecting the needs of women, children, and the disabled, and some by seeking and holding onto power, wealth, and influence instead of submitting themselves to their Creator.

Mark 10 leaves behind the arguments about who Jesus is and concentrates on whom He wants. He starts with a section on divorce (Mark 10:1–12). In Judaism, even today, women are not allowed to divorce their husbands. In Jesus’ time, a man could dismiss his wife for the smallest of offences, including burning his meal. Jesus condemns such fickle men and protects vulnerable women by reminding His audience that marriage joins two into one—it does not create one master and one disposable servant.

The disciples still see Jesus as the political and military hero who will deliver Israel from the Romans. They can’t fathom why He would champion the powerless like women or children. They try to keep children out of His way, thinking they are an inappropriate distraction from more important work (Mark 10:13–16). Jesus stops them and welcomes the children, saying that it is exactly the powerless who will receive God’s kingdom.

As a counterpoint to Jesus’ acceptance of the powerless, Mark shows how those with earthly prestige may actually be unfit for the kingdom of God (Mark 10:17–31). A rich young man asks Jesus how to inherit eternal life. It happens this man has faithfully observed all the Ten Commandments relating to how a God-follower should treat other people. But with a little more digging, Jesus uncovers that the man lives in conflict with the second commandment, to have no other gods before God. His love of his own wealth is enough to discourage him from further seeking. The man leaves disheartened, knowing that his love of his earthly possessions keeps him from fully pleasing God.

In a second example of how the powerful of the world reject God, Jesus reminds the disciples that the Jewish leaders will reject Him (Mark 10:32–34). Jesus’ third prophecy of His death includes more detail. He tells them that the chief priests, scribes, and Gentiles will be involved, and they will mock Him, spit on Him, and flog Him before they kill Him. He also tells them He will rise after three days.

Directly on the heels of this prophecy—at least in the flow of this text—James and John ask for positions of power in Jesus’ kingdom (Mark 10:35–45). Jesus responds somewhat gently, reminding them that leadership in God’s kingdom requires sacrifice and servanthood, not position and authority.

Finally, Jesus meets Blind Bartimaeus, a beggar from Jericho with the meek but bold heart Jesus values (Mark 10:46–52). Despite the condemnation of the crowd around him, Bartimaeus calls out until Jesus responds. When Jesus heals him, Bartimaeus does not return to his old life, he follows Jesus, perhaps with a clearer view of God’s kingdom than the Twelve who know Jesus best.

Chapter Context
In between chapters 9 and 10, Jesus resumes His public teaching as He travels to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles (Luke 9:57—18:14; John 7—10). We meet Him here across the Jordan in Perea and follow as He makes His way west again to Jericho. This chapter surrounds a third prophecy of Jesus’ death (Mark 10:32–34) with lessons on His value for those others often dismiss: women (Mark 10:1–12), the powerless (Mark 10:13–16), those who value God more than the world (Mark 10:17–31), servant-hearted leaders (Mark 10:35–45), and those with bold faith (Mark 10:46–52). Next is the triumphal entry and the beginning of Passion Week.

Verse by Verse

Verse 1. And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again. And again, as was his custom, he taught them.

In Galilee, Jesus had suspended His public ministry. He had taught there extensively, but the Pharisees’ hard hearts reached a tipping point (Mark 8:11–13), and Jesus chose to concentrate on teaching His disciples, instead. When Jesus left Galilee, He resumed teaching the people in Judea and Perea who hadn’t heard Him before. John 7—11 and Luke 9:57—18:14 cover this timeframe in much more detail. Jesus and the disciples went down to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:2) where the Pharisees and chief priests tried to arrest Him (John 7:32–52), twice (John 10:22–39). He went to Bethany at least twice, once to teach (Luke 10:38–42) and once to raise Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1–16). Now He is east, across the Jordan River from Jerusalem, in Perea.

Jesus and the disciples had been in Capernaum, a fishing village on the northwest coast of the Sea of Galilee. The region of Galilee is a smallish district north of Samaria that cradles the western shore of the sea. Galilee is ruled by Herod Antipas, whom Mark simply refers to as “Herod.” Antipas also rules the territory “beyond the Jordan,” or Perea. Perea is a larger, oblong-shaped district along the east side of the Jordan River from about one-fourth of the way south of the Sea of Galilee to half-way down the coast of the Dead Sea. It is bordered on the northwest by Samaria, on the northeast by Decapolis, and on the southeast by Nabatea. It was in Perea that John the Baptist preached, baptized, and confronted Antipas (John 1:28; 10:40).

Herod Antipas was originally married to a princess of Nabatea. When he dismissed her so he could marry his brother’s wife Herodias, the king of Nabatea became a very real international threat. John the Baptist then preached against Antipas’ new marriage, and became a domestic threat. Herodias and her daughter manipulated Antipas into killing John (Mark 6:14–29). Antipas knew of Jesus and thought He had taken John’s mission, but didn’t appear threatened, perhaps because Jesus’ personal attacks against Antipas were milder (Luke 13:31–32). Although Antipas purportedly wanted to kill Jesus, when they finally met, he was first more curious, and then contemptuous when Jesus wouldn’t perform any tricks (Luke 23:6–11). He didn’t try to save Jesus from being killed, but he didn’t appear to do anything to convict Him, either.

Verse 2. And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”

In the century before Jesus’ ministry, two rabbis taught contradictory views of divorce. The school of Shammai taught that the justification for divorce must be very serious, like adultery or an egregious offense against the Mosaic law. Hillel’s school, in contrast, held that a husband could divorce his wife for anything that caused him shame or offense. Scribes judged Hillel’s view to be more accommodating, and they grew to believe it was better to divorce than be in an unhappy marriage. Their Talmud teaches that a man can divorce his wife for such reasons as burning his dinner. Or, even that he met another woman to whom he’s more attracted.

The original Mosaic law aligns more closely with Shammai, and says the only valid reason for a man to divorce his wife is indecency (Deuteronomy 24:1). Transgressions such as adultery were punishable by death (Leviticus 20:10). But God’s interaction with Israel shows a more compassionate example. Like Hosea, whom God directed to take back his unfaithful wife, God took back the Israelites numerous times after they worshiped pagan gods. Eventually, God “sent away” the northern kingdom of Israel to Assyria (1 Chronicles 5:26). Then He “sent away” the southern kingdom of Judah to Babylon (2 Chronicles 36:17–21). Even so, He forgave Judah and brought her back (2 Chronicles 36:22–23).

The process of divorce was simple: the man decided he didn’t want the woman anymore, so he gave her a certificate of divorce, called a get, returned her dowry, and sent her from the house. Since Jesus’ time, Jewish rabbis have realized how unjust such divorce laws are to women. Instead of changing them back to the Mosaic law, they enacted limitations on the husband and gave some liberties to the wife. The legal process for divorce became more complicated and expensive for the husband. Rabbis strengthened the ketubah, or pre-nuptial agreement, in the wife’s favor. They established that the wife would have to consent to the divorce. Eventually, rabbis started allowing women to initiate divorce proceedings for things like unmet conjugal rights, impotence of the husband, or abuse. Still, today, a Jewish woman cannot present her husband with a get, although she can ask the court to compel her husband to present her with a get.

Jewish leaders had a hard time figuring out what to do if a husband abandoned his wife without divorcing her. Without a get, she is still legally married. If she remarries, she is an adulteress and the children from that marriage are illegitimate. Some men protect their wives by giving them a provisional get when they go to war, so if they are missing in action, the wife can remarry. Paul’s writings prevented that difficulty from spreading into the Christian church by stating that abandonment was a legitimate reason for divorce (1 Corinthians 7:15).

The rabbinical tradition is the exact opposite of what God intended for marriage, obviously, but also for divorce. The beginning of Malachi 2:16 is usually translated, “God hates divorce.” That phrase has been misused throughout history to shame spouses into trying to stay safe in abusive marriages. The literal translation of the Hebrew is “God hates the sending-out.” In a culture where only the men could “send” anything, God is saying that He hates when men are faithless to the wife of their youth (Proverbs 5:18). He hates it when men stop loving their wives. He hates it when men “send out” their wives away from their marriage and children. To do so is to be clothed in violence (Malachi 2:14–16).

So, when the Pharisees ask Jesus if it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife, they are asking which rabbi, Shammai or Hillel, Jesus follows. But they are also testing Jesus to see if He will take the same line as John the Baptist who was killed for his condemnation of Antipas’ and Herodias’ unlawful divorces and remarriage (Mark 6:14–29), while they sit in the same area John had his ministry. It’s a smart political move as Antipas and his followers have had their sights on Jesus for a long time (Luke 13:31; Mark 3:6), and they are sitting in Perea, which Antipas controls. In addition, they probably know that Jesus’ conservative view will alienate the men in the audience, as it certainly does the disciples (Matthew 19:10). But Jesus doesn’t back down. His reply goes to the heart of the Mosaic law and God’s plan for marriage, not the convenience or fear of man.

Verse 3. He answered them, “What did Moses command you?”

Jesus’ reply about divorce is similar to the answer He’ll give to the young man asking about inheriting eternal life: go back to the law (Mark 10:19) and go back to the heart of the law (Mark 10:21). In many cases, scribes felt that the Mosaic law wasn’t specific enough, so they added to, argued over, and adapted the Law until some parts were unrecognizable. In the case of divorce, they added to the law to benefit men who wanted to marry someone else. Jesus says that the law simply needs to be understood and applied. It isn’t enough to follow the letter of the law, and it certainly isn’t appropriate to redefine the law to suit one’s own wishes. David showed, in part, why he was a man after God’s own heart when he said, “I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you” (Psalm 119:11).

Jesus asks the Pharisees what Moses “commanded” them to do. The Pharisees respond with what Moses “allowed” them to do (Mark 10:4). The Mosaic law does not command divorce for any circumstance. An unfaithful wife was to be executed, not divorced (Leviticus 20:10). Even then, however, God prefers reconciliation, as He showed with Hosea.

God established marriage for its own worth, but He also uses marriage as a metaphor for faithfulness to Him. Using brutal analogy, God talks about Israel as a bride (Isaiah 54:5) that goes whoring after other gods (Exodus 34:15–16). To drive the point home, God told the prophet Hosea to marry a woman they both knew would cheat. After Gomer left Hosea, God told him to buy her back (Hosea 3). In the remainder of the book, God shows Israel and Judah how they are like an unfaithful wife who seeks out foreign gods. God will punish them for their unfaithfulness, even as He loves them and pleas for them to return. It is this example of a loving husband that Jesus points to when He accuses the husbands around Him of hardened hearts (Mark 10:5).

The point of the Old Testament passage on divorce, Deuteronomy 24:1–4, isn’t that the Law commands divorce. The only time the Israelites were commanded to divorce was upon their return from exile in Babylon when the men married foreign women (Ezra 9–10). The point of the passage in Deuteronomy is that if the husband does divorce his wife, he must do so by giving her a legal certificate. Without it, a woman of that era was legally married but homeless. She would not have her dowry, and she would not be allowed to remarry.

Verse 4. They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.”

The Pharisees are using weasel-words: terms that can be easily bent to give a preferred conclusion. The Mosaic law which God gave the Israelites allowed a man to divorce his wife, but commanded that if he do so, he must give her a certificate (Deuteronomy 24:1–4). Without the certificate, or “get,” the woman would be banished but still legally married and unable to reclaim her dowry. Even today, devout Jewish women cannot be declared officially divorced without a get or widowed without two witnesses who saw her husband die. This has led some soldiers to give their wives a provisional get when they leave for combat duties.

The passages the Pharisees are referring to don’t encourage divorce. They talk about what justifies divorce, what constitutes divorce, and if a divorced couple can remarry each other. Divorce was allowed if the woman was found to be “indecent.” “Indecent” is from the Hebrew root word ‘ervah and means something shameful that has been exposed. In practice and intent, it means adultery. Divorce was final if the man gave the woman a get and sent her out from the household. They could remarry each other, but not if either one of them had married someone else in the meantime.

That law sounds harsh to modern ears, but it was designed to protect women in a time and place that did little to legally honor them. There was no avenue for a woman to divorce her husband, even for abuse, but—just like slavery in the Roman Empire of the New Testament—civic laws were not going to change the hearts of a culture. God’s law prohibited men from sending away a wife, without her children or dowry, for spurious reasons like burning dinner. God made it clear that marriage is for life, and a woman is to be protected. Jewish men had the same hardened opinion of these restrictions as the disciples (Matthew 19:10) and altered the law. God made male and female (Mark 10:6), but He did not make the female to be disposable.

Verse 5. And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment.

A “hardened heart” is an attitude that is stubbornly self-centered. The Old Testament uses the term “stiff-necked,” describing someone who refuses to look around. Hardheartedness is always directed at God and His will. The sin of the men who treat their wives unfairly started with the sin of not valuing God’s Word and His plan for humanity (Mark 10:7–9).

Many of the laws in the Old Testament are designed to mitigate the hardship sin caused others. Men in the Old Testament era had cultural authority which, if they chose to abuse it, could devastate women. Malachi 2:16 is often translated “‘For I hate divorce,’ says the LORD.” An extremely literal translation is “I hate [when men] send away [their wives].” But Jewish scribes twisted the meaning and translated it, “if you hate her, divorce her.”

Malachi, the last of God’s prophets, records God’s condemnation of the Israelites for dishonoring their wives (Malachi 2:13–16). God intended the wife to be a companion, a covenant-holder, a partner in raising godly offspring. To be married is to have “a portion of the Spirit in their union” (Malachi 2:15). Instead, we see an attitude like that of the disciples who, when faced with the charge to either remain faithful or divorce and remain celibate, complain it would be “better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10). It is a hard heart that would choose not to marry specifically because they aren’t given a built-in escape plan. That’s very different from those who choose nobler reasons to remain single (1 Corinthians 7:36–37).

In Matthew’s account, Jesus is more specific. He says, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so” (Matthew 19:8). He then goes on to say that if a man divorces his wife for anything short of adultery and marries another, he commits adultery. So, God allowed divorce if the wife committed adultery, but it was not mandatory: it was permitted, not required We see this when Mary became pregnant and Joseph, thinking she had slept with another, “being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly” (Matthew 1:19).

Verse 6. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’

Jesus makes this comment in the context of God’s plan for marriage, but modern concerns demand a broader analysis of gender. God made humans to be male or female in sex and gender. Sin corrupts. It corrupts nature, genetics, social mores, and everything humans touch.

Transgenderism and the idea of a continuum of genders is a sinful misinterpretation of God’s creation. Science is unsure as to why some people feel they are a different gender than their biology. Science has found that some of these situations are caused by specific mental illnesses. But even if the feeling has a chemical or hormonal cause, the Bible gives no more leeway to act on those feelings than it does a person who is naturally violent, or lazy, or prone to addiction.

In contrast, intersexualism is a genetic defect whereby a child is born with ambiguous gender traits in chromosomes, hormones, or genitalia. Intersexualism is not, in and of itself, a sin. It’s a physical condition caused by the cumulative general effect of human sin on the human body. There is no condemnation in being truly, biologically, intersex.

Neither is Jesus speaking against same-sex marriage, here, at least not directly. It’s worth noting that Jesus explicitly states that the plan for marriage is male and female—rather than saying something like “a loving pair” or other phrases compatible with same-sex matrimony. All the same, His comments here are not intended as a commentary on homosexuality.

Despite what some might claim, this is not a valid argument from absence; Jesus’ lack of a direct statement does not mean He endorses same-sex behaviors. There are reasons Jesus didn’t specifically address homosexuality: it wasn’t an issue for the Israelites of His time. The audiences of Jesus’ recorded teachings are primarily Jewish. People in that culture generally worked hard to obey the Mosaic law. That sin was more common in Roman culture, which is why Paul talks about it in very direct terms (Romans 1:26–27).

Finally, Jesus is not talking about how people should act. In general men and women have different personalities, strengths, and weaknesses. But if a woman isn’t naturally nurturing, that doesn’t mean she’s a man. And if a man isn’t aggressive or strong, that doesn’t mean he’s a woman. Much of the modern confusion over gender identities, ironically, is because of an insistence that some traits are inescapably bound to certain genders. There is room to respect the gender we are born into while we also respect our individual personalities.

Jesus is talking about something much deeper and specific: God made men and women to pair up and have good, life-long relationships. This is a universal truth for all nations, cultures, and religions. God endorses the marriages of unbelievers as much as believers. At the same time, He acknowledges that some people are better suited to remain single, whether because they wish to concentrate their efforts on God’s work, or because they don’t feel equipped to marry (Matthew 19:11–12).

Verse 7. ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife,

“Leave” is from the Greek root word kataleipo. It literally means to depart and not take the object along. When God made Adam and Eve, He told them to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Genesis 1:28). After the Flood, when the people joined together to make the Tower of Babel, God confused their languages and “dispersed them over the face of all the earth” (Genesis 11:9). There is a place for tribes and cities and nations, to pool resources and labor for defense, survival, and cultural advancement. But there is also a place for separation.

Some manuscripts do not include “and hold fast to his wife,” but it is original to Genesis 2:24 which this verse quotes. The passage in Genesis can mean the man must cling to his wife as he separates from his parents. But it also means he must pursue and overtake her, to woo her and earn her affections. This isn’t a passive relationship, but something the man is being told to work for.

In a typical Jewish household, if a son was to marry, he built a room on his father’s house and brought his bride to live there. The marriage would have been arranged by the man or his father and the father of the bride, although it’s believed she had veto rights. Economically, that arrangement helped the family, but socially, it was challenging. The man worked for his father. The woman provided children for the clan. If the man rejected the woman, she returned to her father. In many cases, there was no opportunity for the man and woman to separate and be their own family. The patriarchal arrangements had great financial benefits for all involved, but it’s not easy to “hold fast to [your] wife” when your parents are in the next room.

Verse 8. and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh.

The men of Israel had a very liberal view of divorce. The second century BC Jewish scribe Ben Sirach wrote, “If she does not accept your control, divorce her and send her away” (Ben Sira 25:26). The historian Josephus reflected the mores of Jesus’ day when he wrote, “At this time I divorced my wife, not liking her behavior” (Life 426).

The Pharisees and the disciples (Matthew 19:10) are filtering a note in the Mosaic law (Deuteronomy 24:1–4) through an interpretation established by a school of scribes who lived about one hundred years earlier. The Hillel school interpreted the law to mean husbands could divorce their wives for anything they find odious. They conveniently ignored the fact that the law doesn’t describe grounds for divorce in detail. The passage in Deuteronomy merely mitigates the damage of the unfair cultural tradition by saying the man must formally release his wife so she can marry again. And if she does remarry, he can’t have her back.

Jesus asks about what Moses commanded, and the Pharisees think they are clever by challenging Jesus with such a well-established traditional view of a caveat in the Mosaic law. But they forget that Moses also wrote Genesis. Jesus takes them even further back, to creation and God’s original purpose of marriage. The only time in history a single human being has been split into two individuals is when God took Eve, literally, but with powerful symbolism in the form of a rib, out of Adam’s side. When Adam awoke, God immediately put them back together again (Genesis 2:21–24). This is the origin of “one flesh.” To be one flesh is to be unable to split into two. Divorce doesn’t separate two people, it rips a single entity into two broken people.

We should never analyze God’s commands to see what we can get away with. Nor should we settle for scraping by on the edges of His provisos. We should always consider His intent which is always in our best interests.

Verse 9. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

“Joined together” is from the Greek root word syzeugnymi which literally means to harness two people to the same yoke. Once the man has left his parents and held fast to his wife, the two are joined together by God. “Separate” is from the Greek root word chōrizō and means to separate, divide, or depart. Jesus says the man needs to separate from his family of birth (Mark 10:7), not his wife.

Some versions say “…let no man separate,” but the “not” gives a broader meaning. “Let no man separate” could mean that individuals such as potential lovers, lawyers, or judges are forbidden from causing or legalizing a divorce. “Let not man separate” challenges cultures, legal systems, and communities to establish policies and engender environments that do not threaten marriage. Still, in the context of Jewish culture at the time, the only “man” who was responsible for the divorce was the husband. Not only was it he who performed the divorce, it was he who allowed himself to become hardened toward his wife (Malachi 2:14).

The wording here sounds like stern legalese, but God has stronger words in Malachi 2:14–16. God rejected the sacrifices of the Israelite men because they sent their wives away. They were faithless to the women they had made a covenant with. God had joined them “with a portion of the Spirit in their union” (Malachi 2:15), but the men chose to stop loving their wives and sent them away instead. God says they covered their garment with violence. Malachi 2:16, which translations often start as “God hates divorce,” most literally means God hates when men are faithless to their wives and send them away. These are the fierce, emotional words of God that Jewish leadership taught the men to set aside for their own interests.

Verse 10. And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter.

As they often do, once Jesus and the disciples are away from the crowd, the disciples ask for clarification (Mark 4:10, 33–34). We don’t know whose “house” this is. They are either in Judea or Perea which sits on the other side of the Jordan from Judea.

Matthew reveals that the disciples overhear the Pharisees specifically ask, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and send her away?” (Matthew 19:7). Either Matthew doesn’t record the entire conversation, or those asking the question are missing the point. Moses never commanded that Israelites should divorce their wives. His command was that if they do divorce their wives, they give the women legal documentation to that effect. Without an official divorce, the husband could effectively banish his wife, but keep her dowry. The only time Jewish leadership commanded that men divorce their wives was as the Jews returned from exile in Babylon. As the Jews meet their fresh start, gathered again in Jerusalem, Ezra realizes that many of them married foreign women who would lead them right back into idolatry. The danger to their identity as God’s chosen people was at danger, and they had to send away their wives (Ezra 10).

This causes much of the present difficulty: the disciples have completely bought into the cultural standard of divorce at will. They protest that if their choices are to remain in the marriage or divorce and remain single, it would be easier to just never marry (Matthew 19:10). The Jews, as a whole, strive to follow God’s laws to the letter. They even added laws so they won’t come close to breaking the commands of God (Matthew 23:4). But when it comes to marriage, they completely miss the mark. They hear Deuteronomy 24:1–4 on how to divorce their wives, but miss Malachi 2:13–16 on why divorcing their wives is a violence that causes God to reject their religious piety.

Verse 11. And he said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her,

The Pharisees are trying to use Deuteronomy 24:1–4 to trick Jesus. They hope He will either admit that God allows divorce, or condemn divorce and remarriage and risk the wrath of Herod Antipas, as John the Baptist did (Mark 6:17–18). Jesus counters that, yes, the Mosaic law allows divorce for indecency in the wife. But if a man divorces his wife for anything less than her adultery (Matthew 5:32; Luke 16:18) and then marries another, he is committing adultery. The scribes teach that if a man so much as found another woman he was more attracted to, he could divorce his wife and marry the new woman. Jesus explains that is not the point of the law.

When Jesus brings the conversation from grounds for divorce to adultery, He swings the subject from scribal tradition to one of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:14). The situation is more serious than the Pharisees—and disciples—let themselves believe. It hadn’t occurred to them that a man could commit adultery against his wife. That comment only seems strange to modern ears because of the teachings of Christ. In the Mosaic law, a man could only commit adultery against the husband of the woman he slept with, if she was married (Leviticus 20:10). In simple terms, per the Jewish worldview, only a man could be the victim of adultery. Jesus, as He does so often, raises the status of women to fully human (1 Corinthians 7:4).

As to remarriage and adultery, Paul affirms that if a couple divorce, they should either remarry each other or remain unmarried (1 Corinthians 7:11). However, if either does remarry after divorcing for a cause other than infidelity or abandonment (1 Corinthians 7:15), the act of getting remarried is the sin of adultery, not the state of being remarried. A remarried person should not divorce their current spouse (1 Corinthians 7:20). Whether this restricts a person’s opportunity for ministry depends on the local church’s interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:2, 12, and 5:9, and Titus 1:5–6.

Verse 12. and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

In the second century BC, Roman women were granted the right to divorce their husbands, but Jewish women still aren’t allowed to today. This verse would mean that the woman left her husband without officially divorcing, and then married another man. Or Jesus could be referring to Gentile women, who comprised much of Mark’s audience. A prominent example in that moment was Herodias. Herodias divorced her husband to marry his half-brother, Antipas, who rules over Galilee and Perea, where Jesus is now. It was Herodias who arranged to have John the Baptist killed after he condemned her marriage to Antipas (Mark 6:14–29).

Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:32 are stronger. He says that if anyone divorces his wife for any reason other than adultery, he “makes her commit adultery.” Women were not allowed to hold their own property. They were usually supported by their sons. If a man divorced his wife, he kept the children. Her survival might necessitate marrying again, but to do so would be to commit adultery.

Jesus’ words here respond to a question the Pharisees posed to trap Him. He is condemning men who send away their wives for trivial reasons. He is not speaking to someone distraught by the possibility of a divorce, caught in an abusive marriage, or contemplating remarriage after a divorce. Getting married after being divorced for unbiblical grounds is adultery, but the new marriage is as sanctified by God as any other. Being remarried is not a state of sin. And Jesus says that anyone who looks at someone who is not their spouse has committed adultery (Matthew 5:28). There are very few in the world who are truly sexually pure.

Verse 13. And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them.

The request for Jesus to touch the children is a request for Him to bless them (Mark 10:16). “Bless” is from the Greek root word eulogeo and can mean to praise, celebrate, or consecrate the thing or person being blessed. To bless someone is to do work for their benefit or to hope or pray for one’s benefit. God blessed His creation (Genesis 1:22; 5:2), Noah’s family (Genesis 9:1), and Abraham (Genesis 12:1–3; 22:16–18). As Jacob lay dying, he performed a blessing for his sons that acted as a prophecy as well (Genesis 49). The parents probably think Jesus, a respected rabbi, can pray that God will act on behalf of their children. They didn’t understand that He is God, and He genuinely delights in the children.

The disciples think the whole thing is a nuisance. Their roles in Jesus’ ministry have changed since they were first chosen, and the attention has gone to their heads. First, Jesus singles out the Twelve for special responsibilities and training (Mark 3:13–21). Then He establishes the practice of explaining His public parables in a more private setting (Mark 4:10, 33–34). He allows them to witness His most powerful miracles (Mark 4:35–41; 6:45–52) and to understand—but not spread—the truth that He is the Messiah (Mark 8:27–30).

Outside of teaching, Jesus also gives the Twelve more practical tasks. They insulate Him from the mobs (Mark 3:7–9; 4:1). They act as His representatives when He sends them out to preach and perform miracles (Mark 6:7–13). And they manage the large crowds during Jesus’ miraculous provision of food (Mark 6:41; 8:6).

But, despite having seen Jesus show special care for the dismissed and powerless (Mark 5:25–34, 36–42; 7:25–30, 32–35; 8:22–25) and affirming a man with more faith than connections (Mark 9:38–41), the disciples still think they need to protect Jesus from the people He is there to see. Jesus continuously calls them to be servants to the weak (Mark 9:35), but they still try to take control.

Context Summary
Mark 10:13–16 continues Mark’s depiction of what Christ-followers look like by showing Jesus’ attitude toward children. While in Capernaum, Jesus taught the disciples that in the kingdom of God, the powerless, like children, are most welcome (Mark 9:36–37). The kingdom is open to those who come humbly with no illusions that they belong there. Here, Jesus says that leaders in His ministry must not only accept the powerless, they must recognize that they are powerless, as well. This story is also recorded in Matthew 19:13–15 and Luke 18:15–17.

Verse 14. But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God.

In the Beatitudes, Jesus says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). The “kingdom of heaven” and the “kingdom of God” refer to the same thing: any manifestation of the glory, power, sovereignty, and authority of God over His creation. To be “poor in spirit” means to be spiritually bankrupt. To have no spiritual currency, nothing to recommend you before God.

As we become more spiritually mature and biblically knowledgeable, we tend to overestimate our standing and abilities before God. We see those who are not as far along and try to use the Bible to control them into right behavior—behavior more in line with what we think is appropriate in the kingdom of God. Too often, we build a kingdom of our own with half-understood truths and pressure others to fit our expectations, much like the Pharisees.

Soon, James and John will ask for positions of authority in Jesus’ kingdom. The disciples expect Jesus to restore the kingdom of Israel with Himself at the head and themselves in appropriately grand positions. In their minds this kingdom certainly doesn’t include giving deference to the powerless. Jesus compares their attitude to that of the Gentile rulers who lord over their subjects (Mark 10:42). He tells them, once again, that He is there to manifest the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of Israel. He is certainly not there to manifest the kingdom of John, or of James. In the kingdom of God, the powerless are the most welcome of all and the leaders are not gate-keepers but servants (Mark 10:43–45).

“Indignant” is from the Greek root word aganakteō, which is used for irritation or exasperation. In modern terms, it refers to someone who is “irked.” Mark uses the term two other times. First, in the disciples’ response to James and John’s request for positions of authority in Jesus’ kingdom (Mark 10:41). Second, of observers of the “waste” of the expense of the perfume Mary of Bethany used to anoint Jesus (Mark 14:4; John 12:3). Jesus gets indignant when children are kept away from Him; the disciples when someone threatens their power or even money.

This is not to say all expressions of anger or annoyance are acceptable. Many years later, Jesus’ half-brother James will write, “For the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God” (James 1:20), using the Greek term orgē.

Verse 15. Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”

This verse can be easily misinterpreted. It does not mean that children are absolutely and perfectly sinless, as any parent can attest. It does not mean that children have special knowledge that earns them the right to receive God’s blessings. It means that those most eligible to experience God’s glory and sovereignty in their lives are the people who have no presumption that they legally or spiritually deserve it.

In Mark 9:37, Jesus says that His followers will accept children in His name, and in so doing, accept Him. In Mark 10:14, Jesus says that the kingdom of God belongs to those who are like children. Here, Jesus commends those who receive the kingdom of God like children. When presented with a great gift they do not deserve, children will generally accept it gratefully and unselfconsciously. They have no thought of earning it or even feeling guilty about receiving it. They just want to enjoy it.

In our hyper-competitive world, characterized in equal amounts by pride and shame, we can quickly get to a place where we believe we must work to earn God’s favor. We feel pressured to be successful in the world, with a steady income and an influential job, and successful in the church, able to serve, provide wisdom, and at least present the facade of a good family and righteous life. It’s exhausting. And it’s not what Jesus plans for us.

Our obedience to His will is to come out of a place of love for Him (1 John 5:3). That’s all (John 14:15). And even so, He knows that we will not always obey. Our status in His kingdom is not dependent on how much we do. It’s on how we love Him and how we know we can come to Him as the still-flawed children of God, with humility, boldness, and relief that He knows us and loves us anyway. It is then that the Holy Spirit can do the work in us that brings us a bit closer to holy (Philippians 2:13).

Verse 16. And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands on them.

“Bless” is from the Greek root word eulogeo. It can mean to praise or celebrate, or to consecrate something or someone, to acknowledge that ultimately, only God can work for their benefit. It is in the latter sense that the parents offer their children to Jesus. As a spiritual teacher with a large following, He honors their children by praying over them.

In Judaism, the people are separated from a direct relationship with God, with the priests as intermediaries. The parents consider Jesus a religious leader who is closer to God than they. In the church age, those of us who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit have direct access to God. Jesus’ death literally ripped the veil between the Temple proper and the Holy of Holies where God met the priests (Matthew 27:51). This access is available to our children, as well. But parents still have a mysterious place in their children’s lives, and our relationship with God can reflect on our kids (1 Corinthians 7:14). God gives every parent the important and honorable duties of praying for and about our children, asking His blessings on them, and drawing them to a relationship with Him.

Jesus doesn’t teach the disciples—or us—without example. He doesn’t stand in the synagogue and tell people what they should do without lifting a finger to help like the scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23:2–4). He walks in and shows how to serve (John 13:3–15), honor His mother (John 19:26–27), and sacrifice for others (Mark 15:22–37). That is why Paul tells us to take Jesus’ humility and understanding of purpose as the example for our lives (Philippians 2:4–11). Here, He takes time away from His march to Jerusalem and the cross to show love to the least of these. As parents, we must prioritize our kids like He does.

Verse 17. And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

Jesus and the disciples have left Capernaum (Mark 9:33) and traveled to the area on the other side of the Jordan River from Judea (Mark 10:1). This is Perea, which, along with Galilee, is ruled by Herod Antipas. The “journey” is probably from Perea through Jericho (Mark 10:46) and on to Jerusalem (Mark 10:32). This could have been as little as twenty-eight miles geographically, but it is much further emotionally. In Jerusalem, Jesus will be welcomed as a king (Mark 11:1–10) and executed as a criminal (Mark 15).

We are used to identifying the man as a “rich young ruler,” but initially Mark just says, “a man.” Matthew identifies him as young (Matthew 19:20) and Luke as a ruler (Luke 18:18). Mark implies that he is rich in Mark 10:22. This wealthy young man shows Jesus every honor, including calling Him “good.” “Good” is from the Greek root word agathos. It encompasses what is useful, pleasant, happy, excellent, and honorable. Jews did not typically call other people “good,” although Greeks occasionally did.

Jesus is in Judea or Perea, speaking to a Jewish audience that follows God and expects to inherit eternal life through the tenants of Judaism. Those tenants include having faith in God (Hebrews 11:1–2), following the Mosaic law, and performing sacrifices. The concept of inheriting eternal life is common among Jews. It implies that eternal life is something God grants but only to those who have appropriately worked to earn it. Jesus has explained they must follow the commandments in their hearts as well as their actions (Matthew 5:21–48; Mark 9:42–48). This is difficult for those who live a comfortable life on earth. Even if they follow every other commandment, the rich are constantly tempted to trust in a bank account more than in God (Exodus 20:3).

Context Summary
Mark 10:17–31 begins as Jesus is trying to teach the disciples that God’s kingdom values the powerless (Mark 9:36–37), the faithful (Mark 9:38–41), women (Mark 10:1–12), and children (Mark 10:13–16). The disciples, perhaps, are distracted by the many people who want to arrest or kill Jesus (John 7:32–52; 8:58–59; 10:22–39; 11:45–54; Luke 13:31). A wealthy young man asks Jesus about eternal life—and gets an unexpected answer in return. His response to Jesus’ answer shows that his interest in God is limited by one thing: his money. Through all of history, wealth has been assumed to suggest the favor of God. But Jesus reveals that those whom God blesses often value the gifts more than the Giver. This story is also in Matthew 19:16–30 and Luke 18:18–30.

Verse 18. And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.

This verse has been used in debates about Jesus’ divinity. Some suggest that Jesus is denying He is God. Others think that Jesus is trying to reveal to the man that He is God. But Jesus isn’t directly commenting on the sentiment expressed in the statement. Rather, He’s prompting the man to consider who deserves to be called “good.”

Jesus asks the man why he thinks Jesus is good. What characterizes someone as “good”? And if someone were completely good, what would that say about them? If only God is perfectly good, and a man is perfectly good, then the man would be God. It’s possible that Jesus is trying to quickly lead the man to this conclusion, but unlikely. Jesus has taken great pains to hide His identity from all but the Twelve (Mark 8:29–30; 9:9) and the demons who feel impelled to declare it (Mark 3:11–12). More likely, the brevity of the comment and the quick change suggest that Jesus is giving the man something to think on later: “why do you call Me good? Are you calling Me God? If you are, are you prepared to listen to me?”

It was common in that day for a layman to ask a religious leader, such as a rabbi, scribe, or Pharisee, what he must do to be good. They all followed the extra-biblical teachings the scribes had created over the years. Jesus, on the other hand, tells the man to go back to the Mosaic law as God gave it (Mark 10:19), and not worry about the traditions of man (Mark 7:1–13). The man implies that Jesus, as a good teacher, must know how to receive eternal life. Jesus points out that only God is good, and He gave the Mosaic law to teach the Jews how to be holy.

Even more likely, Jesus is showing the man that if only God is good, the rich young man cannot be good. If he can’t be good, how can he earn eternal life? Matthew’s wording supports this interpretation: “He said to him, ‘Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good’” (Matthew 19:17). No matter how “good” we are, we will never be sinless (Romans 3:23).

Verse 19. You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’”

A man has asked Jesus how he can inherit eternal life, and Jesus responds by listing most of the commandments that have to do with loving others (Exodus 20:12–17). In Matthew, Jesus adds, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Matthew 19:19). In Mark, Jesus adds that the man must not defraud.

“Do not defraud” is not in the Ten Commandments, although the Mosaic law does speak of it. Leviticus 19:35 says, “You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measures of length or weight or quantity. You shall have just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin.” Deuteronomy 25:13–16 also demands that Jews not cheat in their weights and measures, ending with “For all who do such things, all who act dishonestly, are an abomination to the LORD your God.” It may be that Jesus uses defrauding as a natural consequence of coveting, the tenth commandment. Because the young man is rich, his temptation towards coveting might have been along the lines of cheating in business deals.

Before the crucifixion, Jesus sent the disciples out to preach the gospel of repentance (Mark 6:12) as John the Baptist did (Mark 1:4). In that kind of direct evangelism, there is no room for the possibility that someone can be good enough to deserve salvation. The gospel is that God forgives, not that we can be perfect. In interactions, however, Jesus is more circumspect. He draws His listeners into the realization that the good works and righteous lives they’re so proud of will never be complete. They would have to maim themselves to escape temptation (Mark 9:43–48). Once Jesus’ audience realizes they must come to God powerless and without merit, like a child (Mark 10:14), then they will be ready to repent.

Verse 20. And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have kept from my youth.”

“Youth” is from the Greek root word neotes. It just means “youth” and doesn’t refer to a specific age. Judaism teaches that if a young child sins, the punishment will be taken on his or her parents. In Jewish tradition, a boy became responsible for his moral decisions at the age of twelve. So, the young man is probably saying that he has kept all these commandments since that point. He has only kept the commandments, however, in a literal way. Jesus pointed out in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21–48) and just recently (Mark 10:1–12) that there is a difference between obeying the law and fulfilling it. Those who willingly fulfill the spirit of the law do so because they love and trust the law-giver more than any worldly benefit they would receive otherwise. This is something the man cannot do (Mark 10:22).

The apostle Paul makes a similar claim to virtue. He says that if righteousness is measured by how well one kept the law, he is blameless (Philippians 3:6). But he also explains that it is not his own righteousness, defined by the law, that earns him resurrection from the dead, but the righteousness that comes from God and is expressed as faith in Christ (Philippians 3:9–11).

The rich young man’s assertion reveals a great irony. From his youth—the age of accountability—he has done everything he can think of to earn eternal life. This is quite a remarkable feat. But Jesus has explained that we must go back to when we could not be accountable for our sins. Shortly before, Jesus had said, “Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it” (Mark 10:15). Salvation has always come in response to our understanding that we have no standing with God and we must rely on Him (Hebrews 11). Obedience to the law has always come in response to our love and respect for God (Exodus 20:6; Deuteronomy 11:1; Nehemiah 1:5; John 14:15). The law doesn’t give us an opportunity to earn salvation, it proves that we can’t.

Verse 21. And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

“Loved” is from the Greek root word agapaō, which literally means “to be fond of,” but also carries the implication of a selfess, sacrificial love. The question arises, did Jesus “love” the young man only after the man revealed he had obeyed God faithfully? Or, does this statement simply mean Jesus expressed or confirmed something He already felt? As God, wouldn’t Jesus already know the man followed the law? There is debate as to whether Jesus in human form had the omniscience of God. He didn’t seem to express total omniscience as a child. Luke 2:52 says, “And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and man.” After Jesus’ baptism, it’s possible that Jesus grows more receptive to the Spirit’s leading. He does know things that aren’t immediately evident (Mark 2:8; 5:30), but He doesn’t know everything, like when He will be returning (Mark 13:32).

The scribes limit the amount someone can give to one-fifth of their property for fear a generous heart would find itself in poverty and thus reliant on the generosity of others. Later, the early church will renounce personal possessions for the good of others (Acts 4:32–37). But it’s key to understand that Jesus’ words are personalized for the young man. Jesus is not saying that to receive eternal life we must all give away our possessions. Jesus is showing it is impossible to earn eternal life and why we need God’s grace (Mark 10:27).

When the rich young man asks Jesus what he can do to inherit eternal life, Jesus lists most of the Ten Commandments that deal with interacting with other people. To personalize the issue, instead of telling the man he must not covet, which his wealth may have protected him from, Jesus tells him not to “defraud” or cheat at business (Mark 10:19). Now, Jesus gets even more personal and backtracks to the second commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3). Unlike many of the religious leaders, the young man seems to understand the spirit of the Mosaic law as it applies to justice for other people. That doesn’t mean he has given God His due. There is a difference between respecting God and making Him first in our lives.

Verse 22. Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

The rich young man’s tale is a story about someone who wants to follow God on their own terms. The man has obeyed the letter of the law his entire adult life and reached an enviable position of worldly success. There’s nothing wrong with that. Where he finds difficulty is letting go of his worldly treasure and treasuring God fully. He is the epitome of one of the “seeds” of Jesus’ earlier parable: one choked by the cares of the world (Mark 4:19).

It is not a sin to have money. It is a sin to love money more than God. As Paul says, the “love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith” (1 Timothy 6:10). Jesus says, “No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money” (Matthew 6:24). Solomon, the richest king in Israel’s history, notes the futility of loving wealth: “He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves wealth with his income; this also is vanity” (Ecclesiastes 5:10).

Ancient culture did not have the same appreciation for the dangers of loving money. In the Mosaic covenant, God promised Israel that if the people obeyed and worshiped Him, He would bless them with fertility, livestock, crops, success over their enemies, and wealth (Deuteronomy 28:1–14). The Israelites grew to believe that if any person was rich, it was because they obeyed God—and those who were poor deserved their fate. This is why when Satan took away Job’s wealth, his friends tried to convince him to repent of his sins (Job 8). Even the Pharisees, the religious leaders who claimed to embody holiness, were known for their love of money (Luke 16:14).

Jesus is not saying that if the rich young man gives away all his possessions, he will have thus earned salvation. Rather, He is making a point: the man is not actually willing to follow God “at any cost.” As soon as it comes to giving up his wealth, his interest fades. This, Jesus points out, is not an unusual difficulty for the rich (Mark 10:23). It is, however, proof that even the best of us, at some point, want to hold something back from God. Jesus is illustrating that there is no way we can be good enough or sacrifice enough to earn anything from God. As unbelievers, there will always be something we value more than God, and so we must rely on His mercy to come to saving faith.

Like the rich young man, Paul had followed the law faithfully (Philippians 3:6). After Paul met Jesus, however, he grew to understand that his own righteousness was worth nothing. Only the righteousness imbued by Jesus’ sacrifice can earn eternal life. Once Paul understood that, he considered his worldly things rubbish (Philippians 3:7–11). Eternal life is grace alone, through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9).

Verse 23. And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!”

The rich young man’s issue with money is equivalent to the Pharisees’ spiritual snobbery. Jesus condemns the Pharisees three times for doing something in public in order to receive public praise (Matthew 6:2; 6:5; 6:16). He explains that the praise they get by men is their only reward, and they will not receive a reward in heaven. Similarly, the rich are provided for on earth. As much as the rich young man wants eternal life, he finds it hard to “set [his] mind[] on things that are above” when the things on earth are so pleasant (Colossians 3:2). It’s difficult to choose to suffer for the gospel when suffering in general is foreign to you.

Comfort in worldly things is a hard thing to give up. Even one of Jesus’ disciples, Judas, falls into its trap. When Mary of Bethany anoints Jesus’ feet with expensive perfume, Judas scoffs at the waste, but he is really upset because if she had donated the money, he could have stolen it (John 12:1–6). Shortly after, of course, Judas delivers Jesus to the chief priests for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:14–16). Judas finds the lure of money stronger than his devotion to Jesus, and it kills him (Matthew 27:3–10). Many rich throughout history have also struggled with their love of the world.

But the struggle is not hopeless. Zacchaeus is a chief tax collector and very rich. After an encounter with Jesus, he volunteers to give away half his possessions and restore what he had defrauded people four-fold. He does so in willing submission to Jesus’ authority, and Jesus responds by saying, “Today salvation has come to this house” (Luke 19:1–10). The point isn’t that rich people have to give all their worldly possessions to be saved. Zacchaeus, for example, didn’t give away his every penny. Rather, we should all love and follow Jesus so much that possessions are no longer foremost in our affections.

Verse 24. And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God!

Jesus and the disciples have just met a rich young man who desires eternal life, but ultimately loves his possessions more than God. The disciples assume anyone with that much money is so blessed by God that they ought to be guaranteed of heaven.

The disciples’ amazement reflects their cultural understanding. The Old Testament standard is that God rewards the spiritually faithful with earthly blessings (Job 1:10; 42:10; Psalm 128:1–2; Isaiah 3:10). Part of the Mosaic law is that if Israel—overall, as a nation—obeys God’s commandments, He will bless the nation, cities, fields, agriculture, and even the fertility of the people (Deuteronomy 28:1–6).

Over time, however, the people grew to judge whether an individual person was good or evil by comparing their riches. They assume that God universally grants prosperity and health to those who obey Him. This led to two conclusions. First, that everyone rich and healthy must be righteous. Second, that everyone poor or ill must be sinful. God soundly disproves this latter assumption in the account of Job: a righteous man who suffers greatly and loses everything.

Here, Jesus refutes the first assumption: that wealth and health are a sign of God’s personal favor. Or, at least, He puts that claim in a proper perspective. Obeying God’s law in a society that values God’s law will help you be successful in that society. But, ironically, you can obey God for selfish reasons. The rich young man loves God enough to obey, but not enough to value God above whatever material wealth God could give.

This selfish perspective, and the disciples’ reaction, are the opposite of the unknown man they met in Capernaum (Mark 9:38–41). That man was expelling demons in Jesus’ name, but because the disciples don’t know him, they tried to make him stop. They have yet to learn that faithfulness is a greater indicator of someone following Jesus than worldly honor.

This is the only time Mark records Jesus calling the disciples “children.” Sometime before, when the disciples try to keep the children away from Jesus, Jesus tells them, “whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it” (Mark 10:15). Here, Jesus may be identifying the disciples as those who follow and submit to their teacher, emphasizing that they need to heed His words. He may also be reminding them that when it comes to inheriting eternal life, they are powerless and completely without merit.

Verse 25. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”

Some scholars say that the “eye of a needle” refers to the “Needle’s Eye,” a low gate in Jerusalem. It was a smaller, man-sized gate that opened at night when the main gate was closed. It would be very difficult to get a camel through, but not impossible. An animal that large would have to be unsaddled and stripped of all its “possessions” to come through. While this imagery works, others suggest that specific gate might not have been added until centuries later, implying Jesus had something else in mind.

Others read the expression more poetically, and the words more literally—the largest animal in the area and the smallest hole. Another Jewish idiom mentions an elephant going through the eye of a needle. The impossibility of this, physically, would have been part of the disciples’ confusion. If the rich—who they saw as clearly blessed by God—cannot enter heaven, then who can (Mark 10:26)?

Some note that the Greek word for “camel,” kamelon, is very similar to the Aramaic word for “thick rope,” kamilon. This Gospel was written in Greek, however, so had Jesus intended to say, “thick rope,” a word such as kalodio would have been recorded. That imagery is consistent with His meaning, however.

Jesus tells the rich young man to sell all his possessions, possibly including his land, and give everything he had to the poor. This is not a universal mandate. It is a precise command to a particular person who worships a specific idol: wealth. The point Jesus makes is not that money is incompatible with salvation. He’s only demonstrating—for this person—that there is one thing he’s not willing to sacrifice for the sake of obeying God.

Jesus will also continue to tell the disciples that to inherit the kingdom of God, they must let go of their desire for power and authority. Salvation must be dependent on our trust in Jesus to carry our sins, or no one would ever be saved (Mark 10:27). To fully follow Him, however, Jesus calls us to be willing to surrender our idols. For some, it is enormous wealth. But, for others, the idol may simply be the sense of “financial security,” where we don’t feel any risk or sacrifice in our giving. It may be personal health, security under a political system, or the freedom to choose what is best for ourselves and our families. Jesus doesn’t promise any of this. Indeed, Paul sacrificed everything, including his life, in his mission to spread the gospel. Still, he said, “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Romans 8:18).

We need to consider what earthly treasure we are holding on to so tightly that our grip could pull a camel through the eye of a needle. Then we need to be able to open our hands and offer it to God.

Verse 26. And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, “Then who can be saved?”

Under the Mosaic law, God promised Israel blessing if they obeyed Him (Deuteronomy 28:1–6). By Jesus’ day, that national-level promise had been twisted into a cultural judgment about wealth and spirituality. Popular views held that anyone who suffered must do so because they were disobedient, and anyone blessed must be so because they followed God’s law. Although the disciples expect positions of power in Jesus’ kingdom, they apparently have no illusions about their personal holiness. If being rich isn’t a sign someone deserves to inherit eternal life, then a group of itinerant disciples have no chance.

The question of who can be saved is as important today as it was to the disciples. Jesus’ answer to the rich young man, and His remark to the disciples, are such a famous part of His teachings that we often forget how shocking they were at the time He spoke. The disciples initially see this as a horrific, disastrous truth. If a man kept the law and was—supposedly—rewarded for holiness with material blessings, but could not earn eternal life, then no one can! The disciples, worried about who will be the greatest in the kingdom of God (Mark 10:35–44), can’t fathom that they don’t deserve to be there at all.

Echoing the first part of this crucial truth, James, Jesus’ half-brother and the pastor of the church in Jerusalem, will say, “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it” (James 2:10). And Paul will explain that everyone has sinned (Romans 3:23).

The second half of this teaching, however, is that no one can be saved on their own. We are not only incapable of earning salvation, we can’t even choose it on our own. Thankfully, God chooses who will be saved (Romans 8:29–30; Ephesians 1:5, 11). And there is no mystery as to whom is chosen: if you follow Jesus and rely on Him for your salvation, you are chosen. Jesus will point this out in the next verse: salvation is, in fact, possible, but only with, through, and by God.

Verse 27. Jesus looked at them and said, “With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God.”

This is the heart of the gospel. After the hyperbole of Mark 9:42–48 and the extreme expectations of Matthew 5:17–48, Jesus explains that it is impossible for us to inherit eternal life on our own. Only God can save us. Paul explains this more clearly: “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9).

Jesus is not introducing a new way of salvation. Hebrews 11:1–2 says, “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not see. For by it the people of old received their commendation.” The passage then gives a list of people from the Old Testament who were saved by faith. That roster didn’t begin with Moses or someone else who had received the law. Rather, it started with Abel, from the second generation of people on earth. Everyone who is, has been, or will be saved, is saved by grace through faith.

Selfish and arrogant as we are, humanity still struggles to accept this idea. Jesus says it is difficult for the rich to trust God for salvation. Conversely, there are several cases in the Bible where despised criminals do have faith. Levi, the tax collector, becomes a disciple (Mark 2:13–17). Zacchaeus cheated those he collected taxes from, but happily pays them back after his conversion (Luke 19:1–10). The thief who was crucified next to Jesus acknowledges and embraces his helpless state (Luke 23:39–43). And Paul, who persecuted the church, gives his life spreading the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 8:1–3).

Salvation is not restricted to those who grew up in the church, went to Sunday school, and tried to be good. It’s easy, and all too common, to write certain people off as “too far gone,” or “beyond hope.” But God also offers grace to the vilest of people: the traffickers and rapists, terrorists and dictators. When it comes to salvation, there is no difference between the “good” person and the criminal (James 2:10). Any who come to faith in Christ can be forgiven and saved. Jesus did not come to call the righteous, but the sinners (Mark 2:17).

Verse 28. Peter began to say to him, “See, we have left everything and followed you.”

The disciples have been stunned by Jesus’ revelation that a rich man, supposedly blessed by God, cannot earn a one-way ticket to heaven (Mark 10:21). The ever-impulsive Peter tries to find a balance in Jesus’ words. Jesus told the rich young man that he could not be saved until he gave up everything he owned. The point of this was not to demand all Christians be poor, but to prove that the young man was not willing to follow God at any cost.

Peter latches on to the idea of giving away one’s possessions in an attempt to secure the Twelve’s footing in Jesus’ coming kingdom. “We did that: we gave everything away!” he seems to argue. His claim is exaggerated, however. He and Andrew left their home and fishing business, but they still have the house and boat (Mark 3:9; 4:1, 36; 9:33).

Jesus has already affirmed the disciples’ sacrifice, apparently on their way down from Galilee. First, a man promises to follow Jesus, but Jesus reminds the man He doesn’t even have a home. Then, Jesus calls another man to follow, but the man wants to bury his father first, a process that could take a year. Another man wants to follow, but not until he says goodbye to his family. Jesus responds, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:57–62).

It’s human nature to compare ourselves to others to figure out where we stand. We do this both for self-assurance in our position and to gain honor. The disciples did this to each other when they were back in Capernaum (Mark 9:33–34). But Jesus’ call to the rich young man is specific to that unique person: that man valued his riches more than God. The disciples don’t yet see their idol, which is not money—it’s power and authority (Mark 9:33–37; 10:35–45). The disciples fully understand that salvation must be gifted, not earned, at Pentecost with the coming of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2).

Verse 29. Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel,

Jesus has already established that His followers’ true family consists of other Christ-followers (Mark 3:31–35). This means God may call us to leave our earthly families for His work. Jesus also says His followers may find themselves at odds with their birth-families, and they should love Him more than their parents (Matthew 10:35–37). Despite what some take these words to mean, Jesus categorically does not say…

• …that we should divorce an unbelieving spouse (1 Corinthians 7:12–16).
• …that following God’s will is an excuse to abandon older parents with no support (Mark 7:1–13; John 19:26–27).
• …that we can be cruel to those who are angry with us for following Jesus (Matthew 5:42–48).
• …that we can abandon our children if they choose not to follow Christ (1 Corinthians 7:14).

Interestingly, Mark does not quote Jesus telling them they must be willing to leave their wives as Luke does (Luke 18:29). Paul later mentions that Peter takes his wife with him (1 Corinthians 9:5), and tradition states that she was crucified next to him.

Jesus will call us to abandon something, however. At the very least, we’re called to abandon our old way of life, and the selfish thinking which comes with it. We might be asked, in addition, to give up something malevolent like a sinful habit, neutral like wealth, or beneficial like a good job or church. Different believers may be called on to make different changes, or sacrifice different things. Whatever it is, the temptation arises due to those things coming between our desires and God’s will for our lives. The measure of our trust in God will determine how tightly we hold on to what God asks us to let go.

Verse 30. who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.

When Jesus promises a hundredfold houses, He doesn’t mean all Christians will become real estate magnates. He is referring to the community of the church which is designed to share (Acts 2:45) and show hospitality (3 John). When Jesus promises an extended family, He means fellow believers. When Jesus’ mother and brothers want Him to stop teaching and return to Nazareth, He turns to His followers and says, “For whoever does the will of God, he is my brother and sister and mother” (Mark 3:35).

The last bit of Jesus’ promise puts things into perspective. The blessings of being a part of the church will be significant, but they will be hard-earned. Church tradition claims that all but one of the disciples, John, gave up not only family and possessions but their lives for Jesus and the gospel. Jesus’ sacrifice makes the church possible; the disciples’ suffering and sacrifice make the church spread (Colossians 1:24).

For those who are willing to sacrifice their earthly comforts and their lives for Jesus, the rewards of eternal life are more than we could imagine (1 Corinthians 2:9). Matthew adds that the Twelve will “sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28). Paul says the blessings of heaven dwarf earthly troubles into irrelevance (Romans 8:18).

This is hard to accept when the blessings and struggles of the world are right in front of us. False teachers prey on the fears and greed of others by twisting this passage. Frauds say that if we give to the kingdom of God—of course, via that person’s organization—God will bless the giver with riches. The prosperity gospel claims that the good news is found in money. In truth, those who teach it are “puffed up with conceit and [understand] nothing” (1 Timothy 6:4) and imagine “that godliness is a means of gain” (1 Timothy 6:5b).

In contrast, Paul asserts that “godliness with contentment is great gain” (1 Timothy 6:6). He also says that “those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction” (1 Timothy 6:9).

Those who give to God so that God will give them more have the same selfish heart as the rich young man who keeps what he had from God.

Verse 31. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”

Jesus tries to drive this idea into the disciples’ minds several times, in several different ways (Mark 8:34–35; 9:35; 10:42–45), but this may be the only occasion where the disciples are compared favorably. The rich young man would have been seen as first in the earthly world, with his wealth, and first in the ancient religious world with his history of following the law. Yet he is last in the kingdom of God. This is partially because he refuses to surrender his worldly blessings for the kingdom. It’s also because he refuses to rely on God’s grace instead of his own efforts. The disciples, who give up everything, will rule with Jesus (Matthew 19:28), although not as soon as they think.

The next two sections show how difficult Jesus finds it to change the disciples’ worldview. First, He will prophesy His death for the third time. In this case, Jesus specifically mentions He will be mocked, spit on, and flogged. In the very next story, James and John will ask Jesus for positions of great power and influence in His kingdom (Mark 10:35–45). Jesus denies their request, saying it is not for Him to decide. Jesus then reiterates that His followers are not those merely willing to face the same hardships He will face. Many will actually, literally face them, as in the case of James and John. James was killed by the sword at the order of Herod (Acts 12:1–2). Church tradition says that John was placed in a burning vat of oil and survived, then was exiled to the island of Patmos.

When Peter mentions that the disciples have left everything to follow Jesus, Jesus affirms the sacrifice even while He reminds the Twelve what is expected of them. Despite the rich young man’s difficulty prioritizing God over his possessions, he seems to have understood Jesus’ teaching in Mark 9:37. The man knows how to use his position of power to take care of people (Mark 10:19–20). The Twelve, on the other hand, are devoted to “a” messiah, but they seem to imagine this messiah as one who will give them worldly authority not unlike that which the rich young man already has. The suffering of the true Messiah, Jesus, and His mission to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10) is not exactly what they expected. The disciples’ god isn’t money, it’s power and influence. Ironically, God will give them their wishes (Acts 2), but by then they will know how to submit themselves and God’s blessings back to God for the sake of the gospel.

Verse 32. And they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them. And they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again, he began to tell them what was to happen to him,

Each Gospel writer focused on a different set of details. Based on information given in Matthew, Luke, and John, we know quite a bit happened between Mark chapters 9 and 10. Included in that time frame are an attempt by the Pharisees, chief priests, and temple guards to arrest Jesus (John 7:32–52), an attempt by the Jewish leadership to stone Him (John 8:58–59), yet another attempt to either stone or arrest Him (John 10:22–39), and the decision of the Sanhedrin to figure out a way to kill Him (John 11:45–54). Even Herod Antipas wants to kill Jesus, although vaguely and without much effort as was his reputation (Luke 13:31). In addition, Jesus tells the Jewish leadership their father is Satan (John 8:44) and some of them counter by claiming Jesus is possessed (John 10:21).

So, it’s no surprise that Jesus’ followers would be afraid as they walk toward Jerusalem. The wording, however, leaves us confused as to who “they”—the fearful followers—are. They may be the Twelve, trailing behind Jesus as is appropriate for disciples. But they may be other disciples following the Twelve. While Jesus had warned the disciples before that He will be killed (Mark 8:31–33; 9:30–32), this is the first time He notes the location. Combining this with the threats that have been building against Jesus, all of Jesus’ followers have reason to be afraid.

Jesus shows resolve, not fear. The night before the crucifixion, resolve will combine with anguish (Mark 14:34–38). Many people wonder why Jesus agonizes over the crucifixion if He knows He will come through it alive and glorified. Certainly, the knowledge that His sacrifice will be accepted by God and cover the sins of millions gives Him the courage to walk to Jerusalem. But He knows what is coming (Mark 10:33–34). No sane person would face mocking, spitting, flogging, and death by crucifixion without dread. Even worse than the physical pain, the betrayal by His friend Judas, and the rejection by His creation, Jesus must watch His Father turn away, abandoning Him to the sins of the world (Mark 15:33–39).

Context Summary
Mark 10:32–34 is the third time (Mark 8:31–33; 9:30–32) that Jesus tells His disciples He will be killed and rise again after three days. For the third time, the disciples don’t understand. Their incomprehension seems inexcusable, but our hindsight benefits from more than two thousand years of Christian teaching. Luke gives us additional insight: God is hiding the full meaning of Jesus’ words from them (Luke 18:34). Maybe to bolster the disciples’ courage, but maybe because the fulfilled prophecy would have a greater effect on the disciples than a warning (Luke 24:6–8). This section is also found in Matthew 20:17–19 and Luke 18:31–34.

Verse 33. saying, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles.

The title the “Son of Man” is taken from Daniel: “There came one like a son of man…And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13–14). Jesus uses this title for Himself often. The Twelve welcome the image of Jesus as the conquering Messiah, come to rescue Israel from the evil Romans. Their fear is mixed with the hope that they will see the day promised in Daniel and be a part of His ruling government (Mark 10:35–37). They will (Matthew 19:28), but not before facing their own death marches (Mark 8:34–38).

Once again, Jesus tells the disciples that this Son of Man is going to be betrayed (Mark 14:10), beaten, and killed (Mark 10:34). This time, however, He is more specific, explaining that He will be taken to the chief priests and scribes but executed by the Gentiles. He also adds that He will be mocked, spit on, and scourged. The prediction recalls Old Testament prophecies which mention mocking (Psalm 22:6–7), scourging, and spitting (Isaiah 50:6). Isaiah 53 predicts several other ignominies Jesus will suffer, including being despised and rejected (Isaiah 53:3), pierced (Isaiah 53:5), silent when given the chance to defend Himself (Isaiah 53:7), killed near wicked men, and buried near the rich (Isaiah 53:9).

The argument over who killed Jesus has caused great pain over the centuries and terrible persecution against Jews. Jesus is clear here, and His words will be proven in the crucifixion account: while the Jewish chief priests and scribes condemn Jesus to death, it is the Gentile Romans who kill Him. Spiritually, the accountability spreads further; God sent Jesus to die (John 3:16; Acts 2:23) because of our sins (2 Corinthians 5:21). So, the answer to the question of who killed Jesus is: all of us.

Verse 34. And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.”

Mark says Jesus will be resurrected after three days while Matthew and Luke say, “on the third day” (Matthew 20:19; Luke 18:33). The timeframe of Jesus’ crucifixion has been discussed for centuries, so an in-depth analysis isn’t appropriate here.

First, it’s crucial to understand that to Jews, a part of a day is counted as a full day when reckoning time. So, if Jesus was crucified just prior to Friday evening, then Friday afternoon, Saturday and Sunday morning would fulfill the three days. Another alternative is that Jesus was crucified on Wednesday and the “Sabbath” mentioned in Mark 15:42 wasn’t Saturday but the Passover on Thursday. That would place Jesus in the tomb for three full days: Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.

The truth is, we don’t know the specific day of the crucifixion. And debate over the minutiae completely misses the point of the miracle: Jesus not only comes back from death, but He does so in exactly the manner He predicted. Whatever length of time Christ was in the tomb, it was entirely compatible with Old Testament prophecy, His words, and Jewish language.

While Mark and Matthew’s accounts end here, Luke adds some insight as to the disciples’ misunderstanding: “But they understood none of these things. This saying was hidden from them, and they did not grasp what was said” (Luke 18:34). God hid the full meaning of Jesus’ words from the disciples, but we aren’t told why. We know the disciples understand something; as Jesus left Perea, Thomas fatalistically said, “Let us also go, that we may die with him” (John 11:16). Still, the disciples didn’t remember and understand Jesus’ words until after the resurrection (Luke 24:6–8).

God does this to us as well. As much as we think we would like to know what will happen in our lives or what decisions we should make, we’re not always ready to hear the truth. Sometimes we need to grow a bit first, in knowledge, maturity, or faith. Sometimes we don’t understand how strong we are and how well we will be able to handle what’s coming. When God doesn’t answer our prayers for clarity, we can always pray that He will prepare us for the future. Knowing we need to trust Him may be all the preparation we require.

Verse 35. And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came up to him and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.”

Mark first mentions James and John after Jesus’ temptation, when He calls them to follow Him. James and John do so, leaving behind their father, Zebedee, and their fishing business (Mark 1:19–20). With Peter, they become the inner core of Jesus’ disciples. Only these three watch Jesus raise a little girl from the dead (Mark 5:35–43) and see the transfiguration (Mark 9:2–13). James and John’s mother is one of the few who stay near Jesus during the crucifixion (Matthew 27:55–56). It’s easy to mock James and John for their request, especially as it comes on the heels of Jesus’ third prophecy of His death. It’s important to remember three things, however. First, we don’t know how long after Jesus’ prophecy James and John make their request. Second, other Scripture makes it clear that these men don’t fully understand Jesus will die (Luke 18:34). Third, their mother apparently either pushes them to ask or makes the request on their behalf (Matthew 20:20–21).

In addition, although James and John have heard Jesus prophesy His death three times, they have seen Him glorified, speaking with Moses and Elijah, and heard Him honored by God (Mark 9:2–8). And Jesus consistently refers to Himself as the “son of man” whom Daniel describes as a ruler given dominion over the world (Daniel 7:13–14).

We aren’t told how many people are with Jesus and the Twelve at this point (Mark 10:32). James and John’s mother is part of a group of women who followed Jesus from Galilee (Matthew 27:55–56), and sometime before, Jesus had sent out seventy-two disciples to perform miracles (Luke 10:1–12). Shortly, Jesus will enter Jerusalem to a crowd who greets Him like the Messiah (Mark 11:1–10), so it’s reasonable to think Jesus and the disciples are followed by a mob that means to make Jesus king (John 6:15). James and John see the signs that Jesus’ kingdom is imminent, and they want to make sure their seats are reserved.

Context Summary
Mark 10:35–45 describes the arrogant request of James and John to have positions of power and authority in Jesus’ coming kingdom. This comes after learning that Jesus values the powerless like women and children (Mark 10:1–16), that those with earthly power and wealth can have a hard time following God because they can tend to value their possessions more (Mark 10:17–22), and that part of Jesus’ plan for His kingdom is to die a horrible death (Mark 10:32–34). Neither Luke nor John record this account, but Matthew adds that James and John’s mother is involved in the request (Matthew 20:20–28).

Verse 36. And he said to them, “What do you want me to do for you?”

James and John’s request is not entirely without precedent. Jabez was a man from the tribe of Judah. He prayed that God would protect him from pain and enlarge his border. His request may refer to a geographical area where he could grow crops or feed his sheep, but it probably also meant he wished to have more power and influence. Jabez was known to be honorable, and God answered his prayer (1 Chronicles 4:9–10).

Years later, God approached David’s son Solomon with an offer: “Ask what I shall give you” (1 Kings 3:5). Solomon asked for wisdom. God blessed his humble request by also making him the richest, most honored, and most landed king in Israel’s history (1 Kings 3:3–14).

God doesn’t mind when we ask Him for things. He gave us the ability to desire. Sometimes, our desires are exactly what He wants in that moment, like Mary of Bethany anointing Jesus with perfume (John 12:1–8). Sometimes our wishes are in God’s plan, but the timing isn’t right, like Paul’s desire to visit the church in Rome (Romans 1:9–10). Other times, our desires aren’t bad, they just aren’t what God has in mind. Or, God simply has other people in mind, and not us, such as with Paul’s attempt to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6).

Even our selfish desires provide us with an opportunity for growth, as James and John experience here. Jesus engages with James and John, drawing out what it is they want. Once they are honest about their desires, Jesus can lead them in the harder work of submitting those desires to God and altering their ambitions to fit into the kingdom of God. No matter our desire, when we approach God honestly with it, He can use that to make us more spiritually mature.

Verse 37. And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.”

Jesus and the disciples are not traveling into dangerous territory alone. They are followed by several women (Matthew 27:55–56) and others, at least some of whom are frightened (Mark 10:32) and expect things will not go well (John 11:16). They are crossing the Perean/Judaean border, nearing Jericho, on their way to Jerusalem. When they reach Jerusalem, Jesus will mount a donkey colt and ride into the city while people spread their cloaks and palm fronds on the ground, shouting, “Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David!” (Mark 11:1–10). The intent to make Jesus king has been simmering at least since the feeding of thousands outside of Bethsaida (John 6:15), and it’s reasonable to assume the disciples know about it and approve.

All of this combined is why James and John have reason to think Jesus will be soon coming into His kingdom. Jesus has only recently told them, after the interaction with the rich young ruler, that the Twelve will “sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28). James and John apparently want a higher seat at the proverbial table, despite Jesus’ teaching that this presumption is likely to get you publicly humiliated (Luke 14:7–11).

The seat to the right of the king has long been one of an honored advisor (1 Kings 2:19; Psalm 110:1). Where Samuel says that Jonathan sat “opposite” King Saul and Abner sat “by Saul’s side” (1 Samuel 20:25) the Jewish historian Josephus specifies that Jonathan sat on Saul’s right and Abner on the left (Josephus, Antiquities, VI. Xi. 9).

James and John are two of Jesus’ three closest friends, and they are willing to face what will come to make Jesus king (Mark 10:39). They think Jesus needs advisors, which would be correct if Jesus were “only” the Son of Man, presented with the everlasting dominion by the Ancient of Days (Daniel 7:13–14). In classical Judaism, the expression “son of man” merely refers to God’s limited, mortal, human creation, not the Messiah. But Jesus is also the Son of God and God. And God does not need the counsel of man (Isaiah 40:13–14; Job 40:6–41:34).

Verse 38. Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?”

Jesus’ rebuke to James and John appears surprisingly gentle. Perhaps this is because He knows they will suffer for Him and the gospel before they receive any glory.

To “drink someone’s cup” means to share in their fate. The tense used for the verb “drink” here may mean that Jesus is in the process of drinking, not that the “cup” is yet to come. But it also may refer to an action in the future that is so assured it can be considered already present. The Old Testament frequently uses “the cup of God’s wrath” as a metaphor for His judgment for humanity’s rebellion against Him (Psalm 75:8; Isaiah 51:17; Ezekiel 23:31–34). It is this “cup” that Jesus drinks when He hangs on the cross, the Father’s face turned away (Mark 15:34).

The reason Jesus came is so that we will not have to drink the cup of God’s wrath, and Jesus does not ask us to drink the cup of God’s wrath with Him. He asks us to drink the cup of His blood, so we are covered by His sacrifice and protected from God’s wrath (Mark 14:22–25), as the Israelites were during the Passover (Exodus 12).

In our churches today, we drink the cup, symbolic of that blood, at the Lord’s Supper. This shows our oneness with the church and our acceptance of a joined fate, including the persecution needed to further the gospel (Colossians 1:24) and the glorious marriage of the Lamb and the church (Revelation 19:6–10). Those who reject Jesus in the tribulation will feel the full cup of God’s wrath, however, as God’s judgment rains down on the world (Revelation 6—18).

In Greek culture, baptism is a metaphor for being overwhelmed or immersed in something. This is similar to the modern cliché “baptized by fire” used when we mean overwhelmed by challenges from the beginning. Jesus is, in a sense, baptized or immersed in our sins and God’s wrath on the cross (1 Peter 2:24; 2 Corinthians 5:21). But this meaning is not familiar to the Jews of Jesus’ time although Isaiah did use it (Isaiah 30:27–28). At the time, baptism was a sign that one followed the teachings of a specific rabbi or school. In Jesus’ ministry, people are baptized as a sign of their repentance from sin, and we apply this meaning, as well. After the crucifixion and resurrection, the symbolism of baptism becomes richer. Now, baptism is a metaphor for dying to sin and rising again in new life in Christ (Romans 6:3–4; Colossians 2:12).

Verse 39. And they said to him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized,

Luke’s account of Jesus’ third prophecy of His death and resurrection mentions that God hides the meaning of Jesus’ words from the disciples (Luke 18:34). Although the disciples remember Jesus’ words later (Luke 24:6–8), and they have some inkling of the danger of the situation (John 11:16), they do not fully understand what Jesus is saying. If they had, there is no telling how the next few days would have been altered; it’s likely the triumphal entry, Jesus’ teaching in Jerusalem, and the Last Supper would have happened very differently. The Twelve do not permanently receive the Holy Spirit and His guidance until after Jesus’ ascension (Acts 2:1–4; see John 16:7). God, it seems, may choose to hide His plan from even those of us with the Holy Spirit, when the knowledge would incite us to ruin that plan with our presumption or fear.

James and John do suffer, although not exactly like Jesus. James is the first of the Twelve to be martyred when King Herod kills him with a sword (Acts 12:1–2). The Bible does not record John’s fate. Tradition says that at one point he is placed in a cauldron of burning oil. He not only survives, he continues preaching while still in the pot. He is then exiled to the island of Patmos where he writes the book of Revelation. Eventually, he is released and dies of old age.

There is nothing humans can do to add to or fulfill Jesus’ work on the cross. We are incapable of doing anything to earn salvation (Ephesians 2:8–9). Paul does speak of our necessary sacrifice, however: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church” (Colossians 1:24) The work Christians do is not to fulfill the gospel, but to “make the word of God fully known” (Colossians 1:25). Whenever we drink the cup or accept the baptism of suffering and sacrificial leadership, it is not to “do” the work of salvation from sin. Rather, it is to spread the news that Jesus has already completed it.

Verse 40. but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”

Matthew notes that the positions of honor which James and John ask for are already designated by God the Father (Matthew 20:23). We have seen how He chose Samson (Judges 13:2–5) and John the Baptist (Luke 1:5–17) before they were born. We know that He chooses who will be saved (Ephesians 1:4). Jesus specifically chose the Twelve to be His disciples (Mark 3:13–19) and Paul to be an apostle (Acts 9:1–19). The Holy Spirit even chooses who will have what gifts to serve the church (Ephesians 4:11–12; 1 Corinthians 12:7). So, as God looks out over all human history with one glance, it’s evident that He works directly in that history, and invites us to join His work in different ways. We need to focus on listening for His call in our own lives and making sure we answer “yes.”

James and John assume that their closeness to Jesus combined with their willingness to sacrifice much and work hard for His kingdom will earn them high positions. This is the way of the world, including the province of Israel. In the church age, honor, importance, and authority do not necessarily go together (1 Corinthians 12:22–25). Leaders are servants (John 13:3–16). Unlike many of the kings of Israel and Judah, only those who first honor their wives and lead their families well may lead the church (1 Timothy 3:2–5).

Soon, however, there will be two men chosen to be at Jesus’ right and left hand. But they are men the disciples could never have imagined: two thieves (Mark 15:27). They will literally pick up their crosses and be crucified with Christ, but this will not guarantee them positions in heaven. Great suffering does not earn us salvation, just as it does not earn us positions of authority in the church. Although both thieves suffered, the only one to see paradise was the one who recognized he was as powerless as a child (Mark 10:15) and placed his trust in Jesus (Luke 23:39–43).

Verse 41. And when the ten heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John.

Scholars presume that the disciples are irritated because James, John, and their mother (Matthew 20:20–21) have the audacity to ask for what the other ten want, as well. The text supports this as Jesus’ words about servant leadership are addressed to all of them (Mark 10:42–45).

James—not John’s brother, but the pastor of the church in Jerusalem and Jesus’ half-brother through Mary—talks about what happens to a group when selfish desires rear their ugly heads. He says, “You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions” (James 4:2–3). The disciples don’t get to the point of murder, but they do get angry. Personal ambition is not only unbecoming in Christian leadership, it also causes conflict in the church (Mark 9:50).

Church politics can strain the patience of the greatest saint. Unlike citizens subject to a civil government with strict laws, law enforcement, and a powerful leader, God expects members of His church to be both mature and loving. If another believer sins against us, we have instructions on how to gently confront them under the submission of church leadership (Matthew 18:15–20). God commissions the church to reprimand and, if necessary, punish those who refuse to repent (1 Corinthians 5:1–13). And while we are to submit to and honor church leadership (Hebrews 13:17; 1 Timothy 5:17), we are not to do so blindly (1 Timothy 5:19–20).

Verse 42. And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them.

Jesus has taught the disciples many times that leadership in His kingdom requires humility and the willingness to submit to God (Mark 8:34–38) and serve others (Mark 9:35). He is walking toward Jerusalem. Once He arrives there, He will be crucified within a week. Meanwhile, His closest companions vie for positions of authority and influence. Jesus compares their attitudes to those of the Gentile Caesars and kings whose rule over the Jews is characterized by injustice and violence.

Why did Jesus use Gentile rulers as an example? While the Sanhedrin have some political clout, and the Pharisees harass the people over their obedience to the Mosaic law, the Jews are ultimately ruled by the Roman Empire. Even the Herods, who have some Jewish blood, rule as Romans. The disciples expect that Jesus will establish an independent Jewish nation and that they will be part of that civil leadership. Instead, He establishes the church, which exists under but independent from secular civil leadership.

Jesus doesn’t deny the Twelve’s desire for leadership positions in His kingdom, He just redefines what “leadership” looks like. Leaders in the kingdom of God are to be eager, willing shepherds of God’s flock who do not lord over their charges (1 Peter 5:2–3). They must be moral, gentle, and respected by non-Christians. They must be faithful to their wives and good leaders in their families (1 Timothy 3:2–7). All this is in stark contrast to the Romans who threaten their subjects with crucifixion, place unregulated tax collectors over them, divorce and remarry at will, and kill their own family members to maintain power.

And yet it is human, flawed rulers to whom Jesus expects us to submit (Romans 13:1–7). The leadership model of service that Jesus establishes is not designed for a civil setting but for a family under the submission of civil rulers. God establishes civil rulers to enforce order and justice (Genesis 9:6; 1 Corinthians 14:33; Romans 13:3, although we shouldn’t be surprised when they fail at this mission. Regardless, we are to follow the example of Jesus who came to serve, not secular leaders who serve just enough to accumulate money and power for themselves.

Verse 43. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant,

“Servant” is from the Greek root word diakonos. It refers to someone whose duties are to fulfill the desires of another. Diakonos is where we get the word “deacon” from, servants of the church who make sure church resources are distributed to those who need them (Acts 6:1–6).

This speaks to the role of a leader in the church, who should become a leader, and the proper motivation of leaders in the church. Often, people take a leadership position because their father was a pastor, they have free time, they are guilted into it, or they happen to be in the right place at the right time. Jesus says the role of a leader in the church is that of a servant: someone who takes care of the needs of another. Granted, servant-leadership often involves impressing upon people what it is they actually need. But it is all for others, not for selfish ambition, pride, or honor.

God interacts with the people of His creation in different ways throughout history. The disciples don’t realize it, but they are at the tail end of a 2100–year era wherein God’s design was to insulate a family and the nation that came out of that family from the evil world around them. In that context, strong rulers (civil and religious) were needed to represent God’s authority and keep the people in line, and a strong military was needed to defend the nation from their enemies.

On the day of Pentecost, that model spiritually shifted from a single nation to a church made of people from all nations. In AD 70, the model disintegrated as the Romans destroyed the temple, along with Jerusalem, and dispersed the Jews. In this new church, members are not born into community, like Jews, but invited (Acts 2:38–40). There is no national identity; there is a spiritual unity (Ephesians 2:11–22). The church cannot rely on the protection and services of a civil authority; they must take care of each other (Acts 2:42–47) while submitting to that secular authority (Romans 13:1–7). In such a vulnerable, disparate group, leaders must be the greatest servants of all.

Verse 44. and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all.

“Slave” is from the Greek root word doulos. It means someone who is bound to another to see to their needs; the submission of a doulos is at a higher level than that of a diakonos or servant (Mark 10:43). Christian leadership isn’t a straight master/slave relationship. It’s more like the slave who has authority over a man’s children, even though the children will one day be his master. Christian leaders are first slaves to Christ, for His will. Christ’s will is that the needs of His church body are met. The church body may be misinformed about what they need and what needs their church leadership is there to fill. For example, Jesus cooks a meal while the disciples fish (John 21:9–13), but He doesn’t stop His teaching to help Martha fix a meal (Luke 10:38–42). The disciples quickly determine that their priority is to serve by teaching and appoint others to handle the administrative tasks (Acts 6:1–6). The role of a leader is to look to Christ and follow His direction for the benefit of His church.

The disciples’ confusion about what leadership looks like in the church is understandable because it is a different model than what they are used to. They are not there to establish, defend, or maintain a kingdom under God. God’s plan was always that His Son would die for the sins of the world and the Jews would be the source of deliverance, even for Gentiles. Now, Israel will be destroyed, and Jews will scatter, spreading the gospel to Gentiles as they go. God’s kingdom will expand, even as the Jews’ kingdom will disappear for a time.

In this new situation, the disciples are there to draw people to that kingdom and help the newcomers find their place in the community. Some of these newcomers, like Paul and James the brother of Jesus, may even rise to greater positions of authority. Just as God chooses who will sit on Jesus’ left and right (Mark 10:40), He chooses who will have which role in His kingdom. When we remember that the role of every believer is to bring the church and other individuals closer to Jesus, the label “slave” takes on a new, nobler meaning.

Verse 45. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

While Jesus calls us to be servants (Mark 10:43) and slaves (Mark 10:44), the position is not reciprocal; the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 acts for our benefit, but He is God’s servant, not ours (Isaiah 53:11). Our attitude is like His, but where we literally put ourselves in the position of servant or slave for others, He takes the “form of a servant” to God, not to us (Philippians 2:7–8). For us to usher in and be a part of the kingdom of God, we must live out our understanding that we are ultimately powerless (Mark 10:14–15). God has the real power, regardless of our lot in life. Even if we are recognized as leaders in the church, that role is still in essence a servant.

“Ransom” is from the Greek root word lutron and refers to the price paid to redeem a slave or captive (Leviticus 25:51–52) or a firstborn (Numbers 18:15), or recompense for a crime (Numbers 35:31–32) or injury (Exodus 21:30). Jesus is able to “proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound” (Isaiah 61:1; cf. Luke 4:18–19) because He is the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 who came to bear the iniquities of many, so they can be accounted righteous (Isaiah 53:11).

Hearing these words for the first time, the disciples think the “captives” are the Jews who live under Roman rule. Jesus says the true captives are those who are slaves to sin (John 8:34). By Jesus’ death and resurrection, we can be set free from the sin nature that separates us from God (Romans 6:18). This freedom from sin is complete (John 8:36), but it transfers our slavery from sin to righteousness (Romans 6:16–18). Our freedom releases us from selfishness, arrogance, fear, and the desire to control. Our slavery to God frees us to love others and experience eternal life (Romans 6:23).

This freedom is the manifestation of the kingdom of God in us. However, it is also a terribly foreign concept for Jews whose mission has been to maintain a segregated nation of God-followers. In Jewish history, great leaders were those who condemned their subjects for idol worship and led their armies in defense of their borders. Jesus’ leadership anoints a new age. It is built on submission to God and sacrifice for others. More often than not, those “others” will be the rejects of the world, defenseless women (Mark 10:1–12), powerless children (Mark 10:13–16), and the bold but helpless broken (Mark 10:46–52), not the rich leaders the disciples find so easy to respect (Mark 10:17–31).

Verse 46. And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside.

Jericho is in Judea, five miles west of the Jordan River, just north of the Dead Sea. Jerusalem is eighteen miles southwest. Jericho features prominently in Israelite history. Moses died just the other side of the Jordan River (Deuteronomy 34:1–6). Jericho was the first city Joshua and the Israelites conquered after they crossed the Jordan River and entered the Promised Land (Joshua 6). God had the Israelites march around the city once for six days, then seven times on the seventh day. The walls crumbled down, and the Israelites destroyed everyone inside except the family of Rahab.

Joshua cursed whomever would refortify the city, saying, “At the cost of his firstborn shall he lay its foundation, and at the cost of his youngest son shall he set up its gates” (Joshua 6:26). Over five hundred years later, the curse came to fruition. Hiel of Bethel “laid its foundation at the cost of Abiram his firstborn, and set up its gates at the cost of his youngest son Segub” (1 Kings 16:34). Archaeological findings confirm that for a five-hundred-year period, from about 1400 BC to 900 BC, Jericho appears to have been uninhabited.

Mark and Matthew (Matthew 20:29) say that Bartimaeus met them as they left Jericho, but Luke says as they “drew near to Jericho” (Luke 18:35). One possible reconciliation is that at this time, there were two locations referred to with the name “Jericho.” The original mentioned in the Old Testament was, by the time of Jesus, a small village about two miles south of the larger city. The later Jericho was built by Herod the Great around 35 BC. So, Matthew and Mark would be saying Jesus is leaving the old Jericho while Luke is saying He is approaching the new Jericho.

Bartimaeus is one of only two non-recurring figures whom Mark names, the other being Jairus (Mark 5:22). “Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus” is a bit redundant; in Hebrew, bar means “son of.” Scholars suggest that Mark is so specific with his identification because Bartimaeus is known to those in the early church. Matthew 20:30 says that Bartimaeus has a companion who is also healed (Matthew 20:34). Mark and Luke may only mention the beggar with the loudest voice or, perhaps, the man they knew personally.

Context Summary
Mark 10:46–52 describes Jesus traveling through Jericho on His way to Jerusalem and the cross. He is stopped by a blind man who wishes to be healed. The first account of Jesus healing a blind man comes directly after Jesus accuses the disciples of spiritual blindness (Mark 8:14–26). This, the last of Jesus’ healing miracles in Mark, directly follows James and John’s spiritually blind request for positions of power in Jesus’ kingdom. Luke 18:35–43 records a similar event, possibly the same one; Matthew 20:29–34 mentions that Bartimaeus has a friend who is also healed.

Verse 47. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”

In Hebrew, Jesus’ name—Yeshua—was common. Not many people of that era were referred to with family names. Rather, they were often differentiated by what they did, like Simon the tanner (Acts 9:43), or where they are from, like Mary Magdalene (Mark 15:40). Despite what some mistakenly assume, Jesus’ last name is not “Christ.” He didn’t have a family or “last” name. Bartimaeus knows that this is “the” Jesus when he hears that this is the one from Nazareth.

Jesus is obviously not David’s literal son, as David lived a thousand years before. “Son of David” refers to the promise God made David that the king would have an heir who would reign over Israel forever (2 Samuel 7:12–16); God also promised to “raise up for David a righteous Branch,” the Messiah, who will rescue Israel from her enemies (Jeremiah 23:5–6). Jesus is descended from David on both His mother Mary’s side (Luke 3:23–38) and His adopted father Joseph’s side (Matthew 1:1–16).

On previous occasions, when Jesus is identified as the Son of God or the Messiah, He tells the speakers to stay quiet (Mark 1:24–25; 3:11–12; 8:29–30). With Bartimaeus, He does not. We don’t know if Bartimaeus really thinks Jesus is the Messiah or if he’s trying to get Jesus’ attention with such an honorific. It is interesting to note that directly after Bartimaeus calls Jesus the Son of David, Jesus is welcomed in Jerusalem like a king (Mark 11:1–10).

“Mercy” is from the Greek root word eleeō and means “to give aid to something that is in need.” Bartimaeus exemplifies the meaning of “poor in spirit” (Matthew 5:3). He knows there is nothing about him that warrants Jesus’ attention. He has faith that Jesus’ favor is not something he can or must earn. He just needs to ask.

Verse 48. And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”

Rebuke is from the Greek root word epitaimaō and means “to admonish or censure.” It’s the same word used to describe how the disciples responded to the people who brought their children to see Jesus (Mark 10:13). We’re not told exactly who rebukes Bartimaeus; it may be the people with Jesus (Mark 10:32), the locals from Jericho, or travelers headed to Jerusalem for the Passover. Samaria sits between Judea and Galilee, but as Jews hated Samaritans, Galileans traveling to Jerusalem would cross the Jordan River, pass by the east side of Samaria, and cross into Judea by Jericho. This made Jericho a very popular place for travelers.

“Mercy” is from the Greek root word eleeō and means “to give aid to something that is in need.” Bartimaeus shows what it is like to be “poor in spirit” (Matthew 5:3). Unlike Peter who reminds Jesus of the disciples’ sacrifices (Mark 10:28) or James and John who ask for places of honor in Jesus’ kingdom (Mark 10:35–37), Bartimaeus knows there is nothing about him that warrants Jesus’ attention. He has faith that Jesus’ favor is not something he can or must earn. He just needs to ask.

Today, headlines are filled with accounts of people expressing need and asking for help while the world dismisses their concerns and tells them to be quiet. People in need may be polite, passionate, disruptive, or even criminal. But whatever the words they use, when we ignore the hurting we exhibit the same self-centeredness as the travelers who tell Bartimaeus to be quiet. In the parable of the persistent widow, the evil judge finally gives her justice because she annoys him, not because he cares about righteousness (Luke 18:1–8). Jesus calls us to a higher standard. Compassion (Matthew 22:34–40), mercy (Matthew 5:7), and a love for justice (Deuteronomy 10:18; 16:20) characterize the Christ-follower, not irritation at being bothered or judgmentalism toward people whose issues we find inconvenient or shameful to address.

Verse 49. And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.”

“Take heart” is from the Greek root word tharseō and means “to be of good courage or cheer.” It is the same command Jesus gave the disciples when He walked on the Sea of Galilee and they thought He was a ghost (Mark 6:50). The phrase also evokes Isaiah 35:4–5 in which those with an anxious heart are told to “be strong; fear not!” and the blind and deaf are healed.

Jesus heals people in different ways, particularly those who are blind and deaf. In some situations, perhaps when the person is scared or confused, He draws them aside and interacts with them on a very personal level (Mark 7:31–37; 8:22–26). Bartimaeus is not scared. He is bold and loud. The people’s admonition to him to “take heart” may reflect the crowd’s skepticism and embarrassment more than their concern for the beggar (Mark 10:48). So, Jesus doesn’t have to make any special arrangements. Jesus doesn’t even have to walk to where the blind man is sitting. He just calls Bartimaeus over and declares him healed by virtue of his faith.

The people who just rebuked Bartimaeus for calling after Jesus change their tune when they realize Jesus wants to talk with him. Very often, we dismiss the needs of others because they’re inconvenient or uncomfortable. We need to remember that Jesus always cares about those around us. We shouldn’t need a reminder or a sign. We can always take given opportunities to address needs and injustices personally and offer them to Jesus in prayer. “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (Micah 6:8).

Verse 50. And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus.

A cloak was a wide vest that reached to the ankles and was worn as the outer garment. In the Bible, it’s also called a robe or mantle. They were worn by everyone including priests (Exodus 28:31), kings (1 Samuel 23:4–6), and women (2 Samuel 13:18), although apparently there were distinctions between those worn by men and women (Deuteronomy 22:5).

Cloaks play a significant role in the Bible. The Mosaic law states that if a borrow gives a lender his cloak as surety against the loan, the lender must not keep it overnight, as it may be the only shelter the borrower has (Exodus 22:26–27). When Elijah is taken to heaven, Elisha takes Elijah’s cloak as a symbol that he has been granted that prophetic authority (2 Kings 2:13). Isaiah prophesies that the kingdom of Judah will see such hardships that a man who still owns his cloak will be considered well-off enough to lead (Isaiah 3:6). When Paul, imprisoned in Rome, senses winter is coming, he asks Timothy to bring him his cloak (2 Timothy 4:13).

The fact that Bartimaeus leaves his cloak on the ground gives an indication of how much he trusts Jesus to heal him. The road is crowded, and he is blind. Even if he knows the area well from long days begging, Bartimaeus will be in dire straits if his cloak is kicked along the road or stolen. We don’t know if Bartimaeus goes back for his cloak after he is healed or not. Now, he’s not too concerned about it.

Verse 51. And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.”

This is the same question Jesus asked James and John when they wanted prominent positions in His kingdom (Mark 10:35–37). Asking God for things isn’t wrong; Jesus says, “Ask, and it will be given to you…” (Matthew 7:7). But Jesus’ half-brother James, the pastor of the church in Jerusalem, warns, “You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions” (James 4:3). When we pray and ask God to fill our desires, we need to give Him permission to dig deeper into the request. We may have pure motives, like Bartimaeus who acknowledges his full dependence on Jesus. Or we may be trying to use Jesus for our own benefit. Either way, our conversation with God helps us grow spiritually.

“Rabboni,” as given in the Greek and some English translations, is a form of the word rabbi with a stronger sense of lord and master. The only other time it is used in the Bible is when Mary Magdalene meets Jesus after the resurrection (John 20:16). Scholars argue over whether Bartimaeus is being especially polite, so Jesus will heal him, or if he truly understands that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of David (Mark 10:47–48).

Jesus likes to directly and personally interact with the people He heals, but Bartimaeus’ faith and enthusiasm shorten the encounter. Unlike the deaf man in Decapolis (Mark 7:31–37) and the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22–26), Jesus doesn’t have to pull Bartimaeus aside to protect him from the crowd or let him know what is happening. Bartimaeus is ready, and Jesus heals him (Mark 10:52).

Verse 52. And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.

When Jesus says someone’s faith has made them well (Mark 5:34; Luke 17:19; 18:42), He doesn’t mean that insistent conviction somehow moves God to do whatever we want. We can’t nag God into giving us our wishes, like a spoiled child wearing down a parent. In some unknown way, our faith welcomes Jesus’ work in our lives. The reverse is also true. When Jesus went to His hometown of Nazareth, the people rejected His authority and His power. “He could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them” (Mark 6:5). In fact, the people tried to throw Him off a cliff (Luke 4:29).

Jesus tells Bartimaeus to “go your way,” but once his sight is restored, Bartimaeus follows Jesus. We aren’t told if he becomes Jesus’ disciple or if he heads to the temple to give a peace offering in thanks for God’s work (Leviticus 7:11–21). Mark makes the rare step of recording his name—see Mark 5:22 for the one other instance Mark gave this courtesy. Scholars posit this might be because Bartimaeus became a known figure in the church. If so, the acceptance of this blind beggar over the rich young ruler (Mark 10:21–22) must confuse the disciples even as it drives home the truth that only those who admit they are powerless will have the humility to follow Jesus.

When Jesus works in our lives, it is not often immediate. It is often a painful slog through challenges and trials that God uses to get our hearts ready and our attention on Him. Bartimaeus doesn’t need such a process. He has faith, and he is ready. He doesn’t care what others think. He only wants Jesus. The simple, childlike faith of the powerless is honoring to the God who loves us.

End.

Please Note:

The material use in this post is from BibleRef.com which is from Got Questions Ministries and is posted here to be read by Immersive reader in the Edge Browser. If you copy this material please follow these rules:

•Content from BibleRef.com may not be used for any commercial purposes, or as part of any commercial work, without explicit prior written consent from Got Questions ministries.

•Any use of our material should be properly credited; please make it clear the content is from BibleRef.com.

•BibleRef.com content may not be altered, modified, or otherwise changed unless such changes are specifically noted.